Results 1 to 20 of 61

Thread: SOCOM and the CIA

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member zenpundit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    262

    Default Question

    "What needs to be done, IMO, is to separate CIA's paramilitary capability from the intel collection and analysis functions, preferably in a new organization that is civilian run, similar in function to SOE"
    Not all paramilitary covert ops should look like a raid by Delta Force. Sometimes- maybe often -the government might want a very quiet and unobtrusive operation that while requiring a limited use of paramilitary skills to be done quietly by people who have plausibly blended into the environment. That blending requires the sort of cultural/in-country familiarity of experienced collections personnel or diplomats.

    For that reason I'm not sure that rigid organizational separation is a great idea unless you intend to also slide ppl with the right experience into place.

    Sort of like they are talking about in the news article.

  2. #2
    Former Member George L. Singleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    South of Mason Dixon Line
    Posts
    497

    Default A free form comment

    Trial and error, whatever works, use it and do it.

  3. #3
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default That's the American way, George; we're great at

    doing just that.

    That's why Winston noted "You can always trust the Americans to do the right thing -- after they have tried every conceivable alternative."

    OTOH, whenever we try to organize things, we generally screw it up -- ad hocery is what we do best.

  4. #4
    Council Member ODB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    278

    Default Like to tap in to

    the experiences and knowledge here on SWJ.

    What would be the advantages to doing this and why?

    What would be the disadvantages to doing this and why?

    Lastly if you had complete control what would you do to reorganize our current system?

    Understand the limitations of open source, so may not be able to be to detailed, but looking to see different perspectives and experiences.
    ODB

    Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:

    Why did you not clear your corner?

    Because we are on a base and it is secure.

  5. #5
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Competition is good for everyone...

    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post
    What would be the advantages to doing this and why?
    None that I can discern
    What would be the disadvantages to doing this and why?
    Hard to work for two masters. Army folks working for another agency would essentially become throwaways; there would be no agency loyalty to them. The agency would have different rules and playing by theirs might be a bad lick for those so seconded.

    That's just off the top of my head. There's more not openly discussable.
    Lastly if you had complete control what would you do to reorganize our current system?[
    I'm with John T. and Tom Odom, a civilian Humint intel organ; a new separate civilian DA organ; DNI; USoD Intel; Army, Navy, USMC, USAF, USCG Intelligence; DIA; DoE; DHS; DoS INR; Treasury; DEA; FBI; NGIA; NSA; NRO; A uniformed DA crew and SF (Not involved with any of the foregoing except on an as required, mission basis).

    Competition keeps everyone honest. Consolidation is turf protection

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,021

    Default Where and how does this fit into the overall structure ..

    from Ken
    ... a new separate civilian DA organ ....
    Thoughts about what it would look like ? Mission ? Command and control ?

    How different from the "... uniformed DA crew ..." ?

  7. #7
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Where I put it...

    Quote Originally Posted by jmm99 View Post
    Thoughts about what it would look like ? Mission ? Command and control ?
    Well, not like Tom Cruise and the MI crew...

    Mission: Direct Action -- and all that implies; obviously as a National Asset, it would be on a strategic (in the finer sense of the word) level.

    C2: by the Prez / NSC w/ oversight by Congress pretty much as the current system works for special Intel projects.
    How different from the "... uniformed DA crew ..." ?
    Deniable (even if not with a straight face; well, legally deniable in any event) -- which the uniformed crew should never be.

    Why? Because you can hire better if expensive talent for the SMALL flexible civilian organization and can more easily expand and contract it (pun intended) than you can adapt the various military organizations and operations.

    Not to mention that there are rules in the intel game and the DA crowd, if publicly known as a totally separate operation, does not have to abide by those rules. Better for Spooks, better for DA. Better for the country -- not that such a concern seems to drive too many trains nowadays...

    Where does it fit? -- as placed. That's why I put it directly behind the national Humint crew (A CIA replacement) and before all the others to include the DNI who, IMO, should be the Chief analyst and little more (since the slot is probably not going away). I did leave out before the DNI and DIA (who should also do Humint as should the services and the various LE folks; competition again...) another national level organization -- a Counterintel / Counter terror organization that is emphatically not a LE agency and thus not the FBI. The FBI is ill suited for that role.

  8. #8
    Former Member George L. Singleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    South of Mason Dixon Line
    Posts
    497

    Default Churchill and Teddy Roosevelt

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    doing just that.

    That's why Winston noted "You can always trust the Americans to do the right thing -- after they have tried every conceivable alternative."

    OTOH, whenever we try to organize things, we generally screw it up -- ad hocery is what we do best.
    Not to digress but Churchill is my favor historic figure from my youth, followed by Teddy Roosevelt and Ike.

    And of course Churchill himself epitomized trial and error in his repeated moves "across the floor" of Parliament from one party, back to the other, back again, it makes historians dizzy. His failed Dardinelles campaign was another example of his "under belly" attack theories which didn't work.

    Churchill was originally opposed to the coast of France landings, wanted to go in from the south, as best I can recall, Vichy France.

    Have a good weekend. Correct me if my history recall is flawed.

  9. #9
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by George L. Singleton View Post
    Not to digress but Churchill is my favor historic figure from my youth, followed by Teddy Roosevelt and Ike.

    And of course Churchill himself epitomized trial and error in his repeated moves "across the floor" of Parliament from one party, back to the other, back again, it makes historians dizzy. His failed Dardinelles campaign was another example of his "under belly" attack theories which didn't work.

    Churchill was originally opposed to the coast of France landings, wanted to go in from the south, as best I can recall, Vichy France.

    Have a good weekend. Correct me if my history recall is flawed.
    Churchill was obsessed with Italy and the Balkans, actually. He accepted Vichy as something of a compromise.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  10. #10
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    Churchill was obsessed with Italy and the Balkans, actually. He accepted Vichy as something of a compromise.
    And Sicily and the Anzio operation in Italy...

    But he did have character

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •